RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Medication use during acute illness increases the risk of experiencing drug related problems (DRPs), including acute kidney injuries. It is recommended that potentially nephrotoxic medications are withheld during acute illness, including sulfonylureas, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, diuretics, metformin, angiotensin receptor blockers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SADMANS). It is unknown if Australian pharmacists currently provide sick day medication management advice regarding SADMANS medications. Hence, we aimed to identify current DRPs and the recommendations made during residential medication management reviews (RMMRs), especially with SADMANS medications. METHODS: A retrospective review of 408 RMMRs was conducted. DRPs and pharmacist recommendations were classified according to a modified DOCUMENT system. General practitioners' (GP) recommendations were also categorised. RESULTS: Over 97% of residents experienced at least one DRP. Common problems for non-SADMANS medications were "toxicity or adverse drug reaction", "drug selection" and "over/underdosing" and those for SADMANS medications included "toxicity or adverse drug reaction", "monitoring" and "drug selection". GPs agreed with pharmacist recommendations approximately 40% of the time. No pharmacists provided sick day medication management advice for SADMANS medications. CONCLUSION: DRPs remain highly prevalent in aged care facilities. Medication reviews effectively identify and resolve DRPs approximately 40% of the time, but do not currently minimise the risk associated with using SADMANS medications during sick days, which is a potential area of improvement.
RESUMO
In January 2021, Australia initiated a national COVID-19 vaccine rollout strategy but faced setbacks, leading to negative press and media controversy, which may have diminished vaccine confidence. This study aimed to assess the factors influencing vaccine confidence in Australian adults (≥18 years of age) following the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine. Conducted at Blacktown Hospital, Sydney, a cross-sectional survey with 1053 respondents gauged vaccine confidence and influencing factors. The results showed overall high confidence (mean score 33/40). Trusted sources included the Australian Department of Health (77.8%), NSW Health (76.7%), and general practitioners (53.7%), while social media was distrusted (5.9%). The motivations for vaccination varied: university-educated individuals prioritised personal health (X2 = 17.81; p < 0.001), while religious and/or older respondents (≥50 years of age) emphasised community (X2 = 11.69; p < 0.001) and family protection (X2 = 17.314; p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression revealed use of the Australian Department of Health website as a trusted source of COVID-19 information as the strongest predictor of high confidence (>30; OR 1.43; p = 0.041), while exposure to fake news decreased confidence (OR 0.71; p = 0.025). The study underscores the importance of reliable health information sources in bolstering vaccine confidence and highlights the detrimental effects of misinformation. Promoting awareness of trustworthy health channels is crucial to combat vaccine hesitancy in Australia.